danmachifandomcom-20200223-history
Talk:Skills/@comment-26952857-20170518222921/@comment-32100849-20170525092116
I read thouroughly but answered out of order. Here it is in order: S: "i wouldve understood if his first skill was ox slayer, since he was traumatized by monotaurs back then but now it has no point," C: "His first skill would not have been ox slayer as he did not fight the Minotaur, he fled from it. When he fought the minotaur to level up the first time, he was thinking hero thoughts; perhaps getting Ox Slayer skill was on the table alongside argonaut but argonaut won out of the two. The cumulative effect of dealing with minotaurs, his strong emotions towards them, consistently using weapons made from minotaurs, mean that he is more likely as time passes to gain a minotaur related ability - not getting it as his first ability does not proclude him from ever getting it." S: "bell always aquired skill based on his emotion, he wanted to catch up to Ais fast, he got "realis freeze", he wanted to look like a hero in front of Ais, while he was fighting the minotaur, he got "argonaut" skill while leveling up to lvl2. after that he didnt think much of minotaurs, they were pretty much weak for him, he even killed several while being injured and extremely exausted on his 1st trip to the middle floor, and went back to the 18 floor," C: "...The cumulative effect of dealing with minotaurs, his strong emotions towards them, consistently using weapons made from minotaurs, mean that he is more likely as time passes to gain a minotaur related ability..." S: "then why the hell does he get ox slayer on his 3rd lv up, while all minotaur are lv2., its very pointless" C: "There are other ox-like monsters on the deeper floors; though even if they weren't, calling it pointless infers that you think a skill should only appear if its going to be used later on by the author, rather than it manifesting based on experiences and desires. What is and what has been forms a skill, not what will be as none of the characters (except Cassandra?) can predict the future." S: "Also Asteriius doesnt really seem like a villain, he just wants to protect the xenos... he only killed people who attacked him or other xenos. he doesnt really hate humans nor is he bloodthirsty monster plus he consider bell as his rival, not an ennemy, and bell knows all this so why wouyld he desire so deeply to defeat ASterius that it would create a skill just for him, its really a waste." C: no disagreement on Asterius's character, so I did not reply to this part. However I think your assumption that he got the skill solely because of Asterius is not quite right, and its more because: "The cumulative effect of dealing with minotaurs, his strong emotions towards them, consistently using weapons made from minotaurs" - them - not Asterius specifically. He gets angry when he sees them on first trip to 18th S: "''bell state of mind back then was clouded, he attacked other people to defend the xenos, he was davastated when wiene died and was really happy when Fels resurrected her all his '''emotions' were basically directed at protecting the xenos from humans, since volume10." C: just as the minotaur feelings '''accumulated to eventually' grant him a skill, perhaps a future skill will manifest, such as Human Slayer? Thus the following is appropriate: "The '''cumulative effect'... ...his strong emotions towards them..." S: ''"wanting to protect those close to him" ''and "''getting a skill that helps him defens agains attacks " C: ''too generic, applies to all adventurers. The basic stats help these things so no special skill would be developed? S: "''would be more logical and more usefull." C: "In some adventuring stories, and many movies, if the hero is randomly given some obscure item with no obvious purpose, there is no way they will get through their adventures and say "Huh, this item was useless, silly of me to carry it everywhere just cos someone gave it me randomly". No, instead it ends up getting used, usually saving them. Or like in a Bond movie where he ends up needing every single gadget Q gives him, no more no less. These cliches are found in fiction but not in reality, and not in Game of Thrones (which is praised for its gritty realism in plot development). '''Thus I think that something happening because of the circumstances that led up to it, rather than what the author wants to happen later on, is more realistic.'" I think my answer was not the clearest, but I did read what you wrote.